Shifting Perspectives: Equal Blunt Cerebrovascular Risk in Low-Versus High-Energy Cervical Fracture.

INTRODUCTION

Clinical implications of screening for blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) after low-energy mechanisms of injury (LEMI) remain unclear. We assessed BCVI incidence and outcomes in LEMI versus high-energy mechanisms of injury (HEMI) patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, blunt trauma adults admitted between July 2015 and June 2021 with cervical spine fractures, excluding single spinous process, osteophyte, and chronic fractures were included. Demographics, comorbidities, injuries, screening and treatment data, iatrogenic complications, and mortality were collected. Our primary end point was to compare BCVI rates between LEMI and HEMI patients.

RESULTS

Eight hundred sixty patients (78%) were screened for BCVI; 120 were positive for BCVI. LEMI and HEMI groups presented similar BCVI rates (12.6% versus 14.4%; P = 0.640). Compared to HEMI patients (n = 95), LEMI patients (n = 25) were significantly older (79 ± 14.9 versus 54.3 ± 17.4, P < 0.001), more likely to be on anticoagulants before admission (64% versus 23.2%, P < 0.001), and less severely injured (LEMI injury severity score 10.9 ± 6.6 versus HEMI injury severity score 18.7 ± 11.4, P = 0.001). All but one LEMI and 90.5% of the HEMI patients had vertebral artery injuries with no significant difference in BCVI grades. One HEMI patient developed acute kidney injury because of BCVI screening. Eleven HEMI patients developed BCVI-related stroke with two related mortalities. One LEMI patient died of a BCVI-related stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

BCVI rates were similar between HEMI and LEMI groups when screening based on cervical spine fractures. The LEMI group exhibited no screening or treatment complications, suggesting that benefits may outweigh the risks of screening and potential bleeding complications from treatment.